Oh, Seems I Was Wrong...

The 16-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, will have to serve a year-long community punishment after admitting nine crimes, including his third burglary.

I guess mitigation will be good?

District Judge Joti Bopa-Rai admitted that the Cheltenham youngster had previously ignored advice from the courts.

"You are somebody I should be locking up, but at the same time we have to look at your age, your personal difficulties, and I know there are medical issues," she said.

"There is a principle that we try to work with young people rather than lock them up.

"You are at a stage where your offending is going further and further and I should be locking you up, but there is an alternative."

Oh, really?

Dave Brown, defending, said: "He knows that the starting point is a detention and training order.

"I wonder if, whether you were to grant him an intensive supervision which has been outlined to the court, it could give some progress with his moods and thinking skills, otherwise he will be locked away for a fairly lengthy stretch."

Ooooh, a Thinking Skills course! Just the ticket!

The judge ordered him to undertake a year-long youth regulation order, with intensive supervision and surveillance for six months.
For three months he will be subject to an electronic tag with a 7pm to 7am curfew, and 15 hours of education and training each week.

The judge added: "If you breach the order, I will be dealing with it and you will be going inside for a long time."

I would say I'll look out for him reappearing, but how will I know? Since he can't be named....

Am I the only one who feels this neducation is a complete waste. I have taught the dis-interested and it is like trying to put nails in a wall with a jelly hammer. I have also taught the interested and it is a joy. They essentially teach themselves.

I like an exponentially-increasing sentence. Say doubling it each time. Minimum burglary sentence for first offence: three years. So third burglary = 12 years. 3 + 6 + 12 = 21. Five burglaries would be a mathematical impossibility. Of course in my world, concurrent sentences would not exist, nor would automatic parole or any of the other wishy-washy nonsense. The bleeding hearts don't seem to realise that the only sentencing structure compatible with true liberty is eye-watering tariffs for those who deprive others of life, health or property.